Inherent conceptual limitations of the scientific method and scientific models for the study of religion

John F. Miller

pp. 137-147

in: Peter Gross, Werner Stark, Bernhard Waldenfels, Enno Schwanenberg, John F. Miller, Samuel R. Friedman (eds), Beiträge zur Wissenssoziologie, Beiträge zur Religionssoziologie / Contributions to the sociology of knowledge contributions to the sociology of religion, Wiesbaden, Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 1975

Abstract

In this paper¹ I shall attempt to argue that there are inherent conceptual limitations of the scientific method and scientific models for the study of the basic phenomena of religion. It will be necessary, first, to state what I take to be the nature of science, and then to argue how its methodology is specifically inadequate to deal with the important facts of religion. To do this I shall begin by sketching the nature of science, drawing from such diverse philosophers and scientists as William James, Ernst Cassirer, Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Ernest Nagel, Moritz Schlick, Philipp Frank, Henry Margenau, Carl Hempel, Henri Poincaré, Ernst Mach, and Stephen Toulmin, and others.

Cited authors

Cassirer Ernst

Schlick Moritz

Mach Ernst

James William

Einstein Albert

Toulmin Stephen

Margenau Henry

Frank Philipp

Poincaré Henri

Planck Max